Evening capital. (Annapolis, Md.) 1884-1910, 1887-05-09
Mr.. Mccullough and the County
Printing.

publishing the proceedings Oh the
Circuit Court some days ago in the
case of the County Commissioners
VS.. J. G. King, publisher of the
Annapolis Gazette, for extra print
ing, that Mr.. s.. Thomas McCul-
Tough, counsellor to the Board of
County Commissioners, in his ar
gument before the Court, said
''The printing Of the County, if given
out by contract, could be done for the
sum of $500-thereby saving thousands
of dollars to the county.
In defense of this charge and the
action of the County Commission
ers, who saw fit to bestow this job
of printing upon two Democratic
papers of this city at 81, 800-nine
hundred dollars each, with extras
thrown in to swell it up to several
hundred more, one of these contem-
poraries in its issue of Saturday.
says it
''has waited ten days to see a denial of
the statement made in public print, that
S. Thomas Mccullough, Esqr., Counsel
lor to the Commissioners of this county
had said in a public speech in the Court
House of Annapolis, that the county
printing which the Commissioners had
given out at a cost Of 5000 each TO the
Advertiser and Record could be done for
$500. No denial has come and no notice
taken of this alleged defdndtOTy state
ment by an officer Of the County Com
missioners,' 1--WE therefore, feel
obligated to take notice of this statement,
and goes on to say it "has it from Mr..
Mccullough that he made no such state
ment etc.
Here is a question of veracity,
and with all due respect to the
learned counsel and our contempt
rary whose cause he so ably defends,
we say without fear ofcontradiction
that Mr.. Mccullough did use the
words we quoted, and that he told
US on the following Sunday that
eve misquoted him only in the
amount-that he said it could be
done for $3.50, and that if he was
not mistaken, the late VIM. L. lyle
hart told him that he had offered
to do this printing for that sum"
We mentioned this fact to show the
injustice and inconsistency of this
board. We were requested by a
member of this board to give them
bid for this work, andwe told him at
the time that wef felt convinced there
would be no use in our doing SO,
but as it had been requested we COM
piled with his request and paid no
further attention to the matter,
until one day we met q member of
the Board, and in conversation we
mentioned the subject of printing
to him, and told him that We had
put in a bid at the request of
member of the Board, and asked
him to do what he could to have
the work done by contract. lie repli-
ed to US ''It is no use for you to put
in bid for this printing-you can't
get it-that's all fixed" We asked
who was it s.fixed' with ? And he
replied there would be no change.
We stated this to member of the
Board shortly after our converse
ton with this member, who appear
ed very indignant, and said if there
was any 'sfxing' of this job he
was not aware of it. We never
sought the influence OF a single in
dividual in our behalf for this work
except one gentleman whom we
happened to meet in the Commits
sioners room one day, and causual-
" asked him if he could assist US
any in the matter, and like every poll
tician we ever asked to do us favor
he said he was committed" to
other parties.
We don't wish to be placed in a
wrong light before the public in this
matter, nor do we intend to be. We